Quote from: MrWHALE on June 03, 2014, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: mikemikemike on June 03, 2014, 05:53:50 AM

Dude. What are you talking about? From someone who owns huge amounts of both, XC's technology is currently not anonymous at all. Look at the last ten pages of the XC thread, this has already been proven.

...rofl, no it has not been proven. Are you an idiot? If you are going to FUD at least make it less obvious.

No dude. Your the idiot. Your here mindlessly promoting a technology you know nothing about. Seriously, give up. This game isn't for you. Do you even know anything about XC apart from that you own maybe a hundred of them?

Quote from: studio1one on June 02, 2014, 09:25:09 PM

Quote from: CryptoGretzky on June 02, 2014, 09:22:18 PM

Quote from: Kai Proctor on June 02, 2014, 09:15:32 PM

Quote from: megges on June 02, 2014, 08:23:02 PM

Quote from: lazylocaluser on June 02, 2014, 02:32:57 PM

ok people listen...

I will pay 0.1 BTC to ONE person who FIRSTLY identify sender address called "1" until tomorrow 10:00 AM NY TIME (EDT)

tomorrow 10:00 AM NY TIME (EDT) or a bit later I post some screenshots of my wallet and transactions...

see what happens
time went... tic tic tic

and btw sorry for my bad English if my English is bad =)

Quote from: lazylocaluser on June 02, 2014, 05:25:18 AM

it's working people wooohooo! Grin

I send 1 real XC to address XSQYYwgVVYoGyc23NCTcCvQRCNiidarU71 using:

Code:

walletpassphrase 60
sendfrommixer "1" XSQYYwgVVYoGyc23NCTcCvQRCNiidarU71 1.0

now try to find my fucking sender address Grin

dev...
you are a saint Cool

IMPORTANT:
post your answers on topic (NOT PM)

just a quick guess:
http://cryptexplorer.com/address/XLXKRnecfvnN6RRtLqM9isygJWWUPTdeSF

I find XLXKRnecfvnN6RRtLqM9isygJWWUPTdeSF too :
XLXKRnecfvnN6RRtLqM9isygJWWUPTdeSF
sent 0.99999
http://cryptexplorer.com/tx/c9b6414f9b6cc03a97df485e74bee1fef063f2c66e7ec76839931e522846e8f8#i0
going thru
XVjyeCBgZWfLTjGJxZoa8UE9DYNfRSMCgV
http://cryptexplorer.com/tx/30e6bbf5df8cb9f36a149cfecac959dd7028fd0897b39af2f916b4a20be178d7#i2
To go to
XSQYYwgVVYoGyc23NCTcCvQRCNiidarU71

I don't know if you guys really want to play this game just yet.

ATCSecure has always said that this is just a coinmixer and not "NSA" level type anonymity. His rev 3 will get to that level.

If somehow, the answer is correct, you guys will just create a lot of FUD that ATCSecure never said rev 1 will deliver....

you mean. No one should test the anonymity in case they can break it?

bit of an odd way to approach a feature set. In my line of work we have always tested code as hard as we possibly can until it broke. Then we knew how to make it better.